Philosophy of Religion

This is a paper I wrote for my Intro to Philosophy class. We watched a debate and were told to write a paper. This was the assignment:

What do you think was the strongest point of Dr. Craig’s and what do you think was the strongest point of Dr. Dacey’s in the debate? Why do you think these were the strongest, rather than some of their other points? Did the other side have an answer to this? If so, was it a good response/not-so-good response, etc? Why? Finally, which side has the overall strongest evidence supporting their claim? Why do you think so?

I believe the first argument was the best given for theism. If there were a universe, it would seem that there has to be a purpose for it. Without a purpose, it would seem that everything in this universe—right down to why we are here—is merely coincidence, made possible only by random chance. If that were the case, it would hardly seem worth living any kind of life. The other arguments given didn’t seem quite as strong to me.

The second argument given was that everything has a cause, including the beginning of the universe. Personally, I don’t think there was ever a time “before” the universe. I think it has always been around (and will continue to be around for eternity). No matter what science thinks it can prove, unless they are able to invent a time machine, nobody can know for sure. A few centuries ago we thought the earth was flat, and we turned out to be wrong. I think this whole “beginning” theory is just that—a theory.

For the third argument, Dr. Craig talked about evolution, chance, and intelligent design, saying that it would be nearly impossible for us to exist considering the slim chances. To that, I say that there is still a chance, even if it is the tiniest fraction of a percent. Again, people have been wrong in the past, and I think this is just another case where the universe has happened to have everything set up just right. We just got lucky.
Moral values were another argument brought up in Dr. Craig’s trying to prove that theism is the logical choice. I think that values are determined by us—not by some all-powerful being. If something is hurting somebody—mentally, emotionally, or physically—it would only be logical to assume that that action is morally wrong.

The last argument given for theism is the weakest, in my opinion. It requires belief in a certain religion that doesn’t happen to be everybody’s religion. By sticking to one religion, I think Dr. Craig has limited his ability to communicate with a large number of people. There are several explanations to explain this seemingly “resurrection” of Jesus, even if they aren’t what we believe. The mind often plays tricks, and it is possible that somebody stole his body (perhaps even the church itself) in order to prove that he really had risen from the grave.

The argument for atheism was much stronger in my opinion, and I felt there were two strong points that were equally matched. The first is the idea that evolution isn’t always intelligent at all. Dr. Dacey gave examples of humans with our narrow breathing passages and how close they are to our throats, which often leads to choking. The other argument that I thought was just as solid was the idea of pointless suffering. I have never understood how those who believe in God can justify the endless suffering of the millions of people in poorer countries. If there were a God, it would make sense for Him to put an end to all the pointless suffering that happens to children and people around the world.

The idea of God being hidden makes sense to me. I believe that if we were to see Him, we would be so overwhelmed that we wouldn’t even be able to comprehend what we were seeing. Either that, or we do see Him and we don’t even realize that we are. Perhaps God is hidden only by camouflage. There are plenty of things we don’t see and yet we know they exist. In my opinion, this was a weak point in the argument for atheism.

I don’t believe the success of science would matter one way or another if there were or weren’t God. In everyday life (at least for me), I am not constantly thinking about God and what He might be thinking about me, and I don’t think it has affected me any differently than somebody who does think about Him consistently. Perhaps God is the one who put us here just to watch what we could do with the sciences.
As for the mind-brain connection, I don’t believe that will ever be explained (or at least not in my lifetime). The soul is something beyond our mental spectrum and just another thing I don’t think we’re meant to understand. I believe the soul is beyond our comprehension, and we will only ever be able to understand a tiny portion of it.

Between the two sides, I don’t think I can make a decision on who is right or wrong. As stated before, I believe God (or gods or a “higher power”) is beyond anything we can ever imagine, so I don’t think we will ever know (or be able to prove) if any kind of higher power exists. Even if one did (or did not), I’m not so sure it would change the way the world works. People would still be people, there would still be suffering, there would still be good times and bad times, etc. In the end, I think the best anybody can do is promote and practice toward others and do the very best in whatever it is they’re trying to accomplish in life.